1. The Defendant’s receipt on July 29, 201 of the Seoul Central District Court’s intermediate registry office with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 27, 2006, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of the real estate listed in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. As to the instant real estate, the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “the instant establishment registration”) was completed on the same day on July 29, 2014 by the Jung-gu Seoul Central District Court No. 34616, which was received by the registry office of Jung-gu Seoul Central District Court, with the maximum debt amount of KRW 13,000,000,000, the debtor, the debtor, and the mortgagee as the defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1

2. As to the cause of claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case was void since the plaintiff did not have concluded a mortgage contract with the defendant, and thus, it should be cancelled.

B. Determination 1) The fact that C did not have received the consent or delegation of the right to collateral security contract on the instant real estate from the Plaintiff; and C, within the office of a certified judicial scrivener on July 29, 2014, when preparing a power of attorney necessary for the right to collateral security contract on the instant real estate, upon entering the Plaintiff’s name and the name of the person responsible for registration in the letter of proxy, and affixing the Plaintiff’s seal to the Plaintiff’s employees, submitted the said office’s name; (a) was indicted on suspicion that C forged and exercised the said power of attorney; (b) was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor on May 23, 2017; (c) the fact that the said judgment became final and conclusive; (d) at the time of the preparation of the document to collateral security contract, which is the cause of the creation of the instant right to collateral security; (c) the fact that the Defendant met the Plaintiff or did not confirm the Plaintiff’s intention can be acknowledged by the purport of the Plaintiff’s certificate No. 2, No. 5, No. 2-1, 3, and the entire pleadings.